Skip to main content

tv   Up W Chris Hayes  MSNBC  November 11, 2012 5:00am-7:00am PST

5:00 am
who will turn out to shop small. small business saturday. visit and get ready. because your day is coming. good morning from new york. i'm chris hayes. a powerful 6.6 magnitude earthquake struck in myanmar last night. up to 12 people may have died. president obama will visit arlington national cemetery today. welcome to all the veterans watching today on this veterans day. >> we have congressman elect jeffreys, a democrat from brooklyn. a professor at the school for social network.
5:01 am
author of unintended consequences. a former partner at bain capital and molly, a reporter for a magazine who did phenomenal work. tuesday's election brought us not just a second term for president obama but a new congress as well. there are two ways to look at the make up of the congress. one is the endorsement of the status quo. asking the two to work together as house speaker john boehner put it the day after the election. >> the american people have spoken. they reelected president obama. they have again reelected a republican majority in the house of representatives. if there's a mandate in yesterday's results, it's a mandate for us to find a way to work together on the solutions to the challenges we all face as a nation. >> the other way to interpret the results is to see them as a resounding liberal governance. a larger and apparently more
5:02 am
democratic majority in the senate. it's how harry reid framed the results. >> we had an overwhelming re-election of the president. we picked up seats in the senate and the house. it's not the status quo. >> one thing is clear. it will not look like any congress we have ever had. the most stunning exacten is the diminishing number of white men in house of representatives. in the current house, white men were 88% compared to 53% in the caucus. for the first time ever in history, white men will make up just a minority, 46% of the democratic caucus. women will make up 30% of the democratic caucus compared to 8.6% for republicans. latinos 12% compared to 2% for republicans. hakeem, if i can still call you
5:03 am
that? >> of course. >> i want to congratulate you on your victory. you will be a freshman congress in the new congress. i want to get your thoughts on having watched congress work, you are going to be in the minority in this house. is there part of you, you know, at that moment on election night, not that you had a close race, when your race is called when you think, what have i gotten myself into? >> certainly, the challenges we are going face down in congress and america are going to be enormous. i was largely, pleasantly pleased with how things went overall. the president won a resounding victory. more than 50% of the popular vote. landslide electoral college. we gained seats in the house. i think, from an overall perspective, the way i look at it, there is a clear mandate from the american people. one, to work together to get things resolved, get the economy back on track. but, i think it's undeniable
5:04 am
based on the results in the house, in the senate as well as the presidency that people are supporting the idea of a more progressive version of the government designed to stand-up for the middle class and that we are all in this together and people aren't on their own and shouldn't be on their own. i'm hopeful the republicans in the house of representatives will come to the conclusion they can't continue to stand by a hard line position of no compromise. the one thing i think is clear is the american people want government to work and that's going to require compromise. >> the american people want government to work. wanting it doesn't make it so. ed, you are an outspoken supporter to mitt romney and a donor to a super pac. >> yes. >> i can understand how you feel about the presidential election because the person you were backing didn't win. when you look at the senate and congress and how congress is going to work with the president, how you interpret or
5:05 am
understand the election results? >> one thing is there were 7 million white voters who voted for president obama the last time who didn't show up and vote. they weren't persuaded for mitt, but they did not vote for president obama this time. i think we have to take that into consideration. we need to recognize the president did a great job in energizing his base in not just get out the vote, but obama care for poor people, suspending deportation of hispanics for the hispanic voters and student loan promises for students. those are powerful incentives to bring out the vote that i think make a difference in an election. >> this sounds suspiciously like the makers takers analysis of the electorate. >> i hope not. >> these are all -- i just want you to zero in on what you mean by that? >> my problem with the makers takers, if the government is going to offer benefits, of course people are going to want
5:06 am
more. everybody wants more. i don't view that as makers versus takers. there's certainly a trade off between how we pay for it, whether it's cost reduction or tax increases. i think in the next congress we are going to see a big debate between the trade off of compromise that is going to need to be reached. where the line is drawn is -- there's $1.1 trillion deficit. you can run a deficit and hold it as e.d.p. you need to come up with $900 billion a year of tax increase or cost production. we raised $1 trillion in taxes. >> there's a lot of other taxes we can come up with. >> we need to bring it back into balance. >> molly, you covered washington. this is the fundmental issue we are talking about. it's an ase metric polarization.
5:07 am
it's a political science. impeer cal way of trying to track where people are and where the caucuses are. the originator of this scoring system ran the new numbers. the 112th senate is on top and the 113th senate is on the bottom. there's not that nuch difference. both peaks narrowed. they cluster more around their caucuses. can the senate function under its current conditions of polarization on one hand and super majority on the other? >> not so far, right. in the last couple years, they haven't gotten a lot done. i think this argument about, you know, status quo versus a mandate for if not change something. it's interesting. it's like the republicans are making this argument that there
5:08 am
was a mandate to do nothing because they do not want to see liberals take the ball and run with it. and accomplish a lot of their policy proposals or ideas. so -- but i think you see wiggle room. you do -- i mean everybody in congress realizes this reflects badly on all of them when they can't do anything. >> do they realize it? it's a remarkable thing about the conduct of the house of representatives. the normal system of incentives seems to have broken down. the normal system is you have to go back to your district with something. we did this. that tends to forge a pressure for compromise. i think the house republicans discovered and i don't think they are wrong that through control of the redistricting process and b because of the nature of american politics, they can present themselves as a parliamentary body that was dedicated to obstructing the
5:09 am
president's agenda and not pay a price for it if they didn't get some, you know, i don't know, thing, some little goody passed for the local car dealer. >> they were elected to do that in a sense. investors are always going to be minority. people paying the majority of the taxes are the minority of the vote. they have a line to get close to majority, at least be competitive, right? >> it's a crasser analysis of the coalition than any liberal i have heard. >> it is what it is. i'm not good at spinning the ball. >> no, i like the honesty. >> i think that 35% is going to be elected to defend the taxpayers and investors and the guys paying the taxes. if they stop doing that, they are not going to get reelected. >> so, i think the majority of people who voted for obama are taxpayers. lots of taxes besides income taxes and payroll taxes.
5:10 am
i saw a lot of agreement with this election. i think the people rejected what economic model, which is that tax cuts for the rich creates jobs. i see it in republicans worried about the so-called fiscal cliff, worrying about the taxes going up and spending cuts happening the same time. it will cause a massive recession. we were all, to quote president nixon, we are all -- people united behind a model that says government has to get us growing. >> i think there were consequences. one way to interpret what happened in the house of representatives, they were sent to do nothing. the reality is the redistricting process did lead to artificial results. as you pointed out earlier, the majority of the american people -- >> a slim majority. >> the president won
5:11 am
pennsylvania by five points. 18 members of congress in pennsylvania, 13 will be republicans. that's because the pennsylvania republican party coming out of the 2010 election controlled the redistricting process. >> this is the key point. the wave of in the house in 2010 was at the state house level. they were dominated by republicans. you said something i think is important. was this a referendum on tax hikes for the wealthiest? i think there's one thing argued, it was that. i want to talk about how that relates to it's not a fiscal cliff, curve or faze whatever you want to call it after this. the way it cleans. everything about the oral-b power brush is simply revolutionary. oral-b power brushes oscillate, rotate and even pulsate to gently loosen and break up that sticky plaque with more brush movements than manual brushes and even up to 50% more than leading sonic technology brushes
5:12 am
for a superior clean. oral-b power brushes. go to for the latest offers. can you help me with something? nope! good talk.
5:13 am
[ male announcer ] or free windows 8 training when you buy a computer at staples. another way staples makes it easier to upgrade.
5:14 am
all right. so, the big conversation happening in washington right now is about something which i think is misleadingly been
5:15 am
mislabeled the fiscal cliff. it's termed by ben bernanke. >> i think we'll have a misunderstanding about what is going on. i want to take a second to set the context. it goes back to 2010. here is why i find the discussion maddening. 2010, tea party revolt, what happened? people on the right mobilized. there was a lot of backlash against obama care and there was this obsession with the debt and deficit. we are spending too much money, not taking in enough, it's going to hurt this country, we are going to get inflation, high interest rates, we will end up greece. republicans were elected. then a lame duck session. a huge conversation about how horrible the deficit and debt was. what happened? republicans and the president got together to add $800 billion to the deficit the next year. right after this election which
5:16 am
was apparently this radification on the notion of large deficits. the deal they struck, which is extension of the bush tax can you wants $800 billion, over two years. okay. first of all, i want people to know, when people in washington talk about the debt and deficit, nine times out of ten, they do not mean the debt or deficit. they mean what their favorite policy is, whether it's tax cut extension or tax raises or cutting spending. that's what they are talking about. they are not talking the debt and deficit. when you hear debt and deficit, you have to say, what do they really mean by that word. they almost never mean it. if they did mean it, the deal that was struck after the 2010 elections would not have been the deal struck after the 2010 elections. okay. that brings us now to the situation we are in now, the so-called fiscal cliff. at the end of this year, the bush tax cuts expire. that raises taxes on everyone. spending cuts kick in.
5:17 am
it's part of the deal of sequester. okay? that is not -- i think people hear fiscal, the deficit is going to explode. it's the opposite. it's going to dramatically reduce. there's an intense austerity squeeze. washington is so obsessed with the debt and deficit. right now, they are freaking out about the speck tor of an automatic reduction in the deficit. >> exactly. >> okay? no one cares about the deficit. this is important to understand. people say they care about the deficit. no one in their actual political behavior acts as if they do. okay. sorry for the rant. it's been driving me bananas. it's been driving me bananas to watch this conversation happen. >> right. >> the question is, what are we going do to reduce -- the framing of the conversation is we need to reduce in the out years the long term debt to gdp ratio and strike a deal to do
5:18 am
that to avoid the austerity that is going to be disastrous with the economy. everyone agrees with that. >> yeah. coming from the school of rational expectations, it's built in more than the congressional budget. >> do you want to explain? >> they see the coming storm. >> people are pricing in the problem now. >> one more thing about the reason i think it's a mistake to call it a fiscal cliff. it should be the fiscal curve instead. it will start happening on day one. not all, whatever it is, i don't know the total amount of it. $800 billion. it's not going to be on january 1. that's the size of the check. for instance, the payroll tax holiday, which is two percentage points for your employee. the first day you are going to pay that much. the second day you are going to pay that much. if they cut a deal in january, they can go back and legislate you get the taxes back.
5:19 am
>> spending you get from the tax cut. >> the point is, it's unlike a cliff. once you fall off, you are dead. it's more of a curve. table is set. i'm sorry that i have -- >> no, it's very good. >> what's that? >> everybody is on board with that. it's on a cliff, a natural occurrence that causes a disaster. it's manufactured and we can steer it away. i like it. i like it. >> you can reset. let me play where we are right now. the big question is how are the two sides going to come together to deal with this, in the lame duck or kick it over to the next session. here is president obama giving his thoughts on this. >> i want to be clear. i'm nod wedded to every detail of my plan. i'm open to compromise. i'm open to new ideas. i'm committed to solving our fiscal challenges. but, i refuse to accept any approach that isn't balanced.
5:20 am
i am not going to ask students and seniors and middle class families to pay down the entire deficit while people like me, making over $250,000 aren't asked to pay a dime more in taxes. i'm not going to do that. i just want to point out, this was a central question during the election. it was debated over and over again. on tuesday night, we found out the majority of americans agree with my approach. >> all right. the big question on the table is, if there's going to be a deal, what is the ratio going to be of raised taxes to cut spending? will republicans raise taxes? here is john boehner with his thoughts. >> is it on the table -- >> i made clear yesterday that raising tax rates is unacceptable. and frankly, it couldn't pass the house. increased revenues on the table but through reforming our tax
5:21 am
code. i would do that, if the president were serious about solving our spending problem and trying to secure our entitlement program. i'm the most reasonable, responsible person in washington. the president knows this. he knows he and i can work together. >> i admitted this to my staff, i really like john boehner in spite of myself. i sort of like his, kind of like good old boy sort of, you know, kind of doesn't take himself too seriously when he says it. you can see the smile he cracks. mitch mcconnell released this statement. i know some people think tuesday's results mean washington is going to roll over and agree to democratic demands that we hike tax rates. i'm here to tell them there's no truth to that notion. this is the stand off we have. i'm going to let you reset the table and all of you weigh in after this break.
5:22 am
ing. and a trip to the one place with the new ideas that help us pull it all together. from the things that hang and shine... the things that sparkle and jingle. all while saving the things that go in our wallet. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. right now, get an assortment of martha stewart living ornamen,s free when you purchase select artificial trees. begins with back pain and a choice. take advil, and maybe have to take up to four in a day. or take aleve, which can relieve pain all day with just two pills. good eye. who have used androgel 1%, there's big news. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed
5:23 am
testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62% so you can use less gel.
5:24 am
log on now to and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%. what are you waiting for? this is big news. what are you waiting for? boproductivity up, costs down, thtime to market reduced... those are good things. upstairs, they will see fantasy. not fantasy... logistics. ups came in, analyzed our supply chain, inventory systems... ups? ups. not fantasy? who would have thought? i did. we did, bob. we did. got it.
5:25 am
all right. ed connor. please respond to my rant about the deficit and debt. if you want to reset the table how you see it, go ahead. >> i think the way you talk about the deficit, you are wagging the dog by the tail. we have a 30% increase in spending. at least $1.1 trillion a year deficit. the issue is whether you are going to solve it by reducing cost or raising taxes. i think they are down to 17% and the payroll tax holiday, if it went away, 18. so, um, um, i think that -- well, i forgot what i was going to say. >> you are saying look, the issue is spending. >> the negotiation has to be between taxes and spending. it doesn't matter whether you tax or borrow money. it's a tax increase.
5:26 am
when you talk of the $800 billion spending, it's a one-time -- >> you are rational. >> i am. there's a goalpost. i'm half way in between. i think some of it is built in. >> what is your idea of ratio here? >> i would love to see 2 to 1, or 3 to 1. you know, because you get an increase in unemployment benefits. spending cuts are low because you get 4.5% reduction in growth. they are predicting a bounceback. every year they predict a bounceback that never comes. >> i notice there's a one in the ratio, which is the key part to the negotiation, right? i'm serious. if there's no one, if there's not a single dollar revenue, if there's not a single dollar revenue, there is no basis for
5:27 am
negotiation. >> this is why i think that the benefit, both republicans and democrats have pushed the issue past the election. eventually, the math catches up with you. you cannot close a $1.1 trillion deficit. maybe you can run $200 billion a year and hold it as a gdp. >> you need $900 billion of spending cuts or tax increases. you can't get there with one or the other. it's not possible. what we have pretended and it's worked well, all we have to do is let the bush tax cuts expire and people earning over $250,000 a year. get rid of capital gains, bring back ordinary income and estate taxes are $150 billion. we're talking $800 billion. get rid of the payroll tax holiday. you get $700 billion to go. this is where the tire is going to hit the road. people are going to realize how tough it is to really bring the
5:28 am
fiscal balance back together again. >> you know, some of the spending actually pays for itself. if we spend money on unemployment, spend money on intrastructure, spend money on things state and local governments pay for, it puts people back to work. is that the only number i care about here, today, this morning is 7.9. it's the unemployment rate. 7.9% is better than we have had the last four years and the beginning of the recession. it's still recession nar numbers of unemployment. it increases the multiplier. that spending translates into jobs and people start paying taxes. that's the way -- >> we have a 30% increase in spending. wefr running a $1.1 trillion -- >> that spending -- >> we have 8% unemployment. >> hey, if that -- >> you know that's not a legitimate argument, right?
5:29 am
>> if that spending had not been there -- ed, if that spending had not been there, the unemployment rate would be 10% and 11%. >> you have to pay back. then you see what they predict. >> that's the thing i want to question. the thing we are bounding this in is the premise about we have to close the deficit or debt to gdp has to be something. i'm not convinced it's the case. >> go tap forever? >> yeah, basically, i do. i think we have the world's reserve currency. i think at some point, right, there's two problem that is come with running too much of a deficit, right? you get interest rates going up, right? because people don't think you can pay it back. you get inflation. if you expand the monetary base. exactly. >> inflation. >> engineered. right. but the point is, we don't have either of those things. someone who believes in the
5:30 am
market gets the price right. net present value is calculated, explain why the bond markets, which you say are rational and make these long-term projections why they have not priced them in today. >> the rest of the world is going down the toilet. there's enormous excess capacity. >> i think we are debating this, the timing of when the market price hits. i'm not 100% on one side or the other. i'm half way in between. the market is why you can spend $1.1 trillion and still be in a recession. a lot of it ends. the private sector dials up and down. if you want to dial up it -- >> dial down? >> private -- regardless, spending is up 30%. okay? from where we were in 2007. the public sector is up. private sector is down. the two compensate.
5:31 am
not 100%. not perfectly in time. >> right. >> i don't think there's many people that are going to disagree with where we have to be in the long run. i don't think they think we can run this deficit forever. >> what would you be saying in the caucus meetings after we take a break. [ tylenol bottle ] nyquil what are you doing?
5:32 am
[ nyquil bottle ] just reading your label. relieve nasal congestion? sure don't you? [ nyquil bottle ] dude! [ female announcer ] tylenol® cold multi-symptom nighttime relieves nasal congestion. nyquil® cold and flu doesn't.
5:33 am
aflac... and major medical? major medical, boyyy, yeah! [ beatboxing ] berr, der berrp... ♪ i help pay the doctor ♪ ain't that enough for you? ♪ there's things major medical doesn't do.
5:34 am
aflac! pays cash so we don't have to fret. [ together ] ♪ something families should get ♪ ♪ like a safety net ♪ help with food, gas and rent, so cover your back, with... ♪ a-a-a-a-a-a-a-aflac! [ male announcer ] help protect your family at [ beatboxing ] hakeem, you are not yet a united states congressman. you will be beginning next year. if you were in the democratic caucus meetings having these meetings about how to approach these negotiations -- thank you for staying with us america. what would your position be? what do people in your district care about? what do you want to see come out of this if you were representing your district, come back and be proud. >> i think the debt and the deficit are legitimate issues and people do care about those
5:35 am
things? >> do they care in brooklyn? i'm serious. >> absolutely. i think that people are concerned when they hear the number $15 trillion, what does that mean for their children and grandchildren? it's hard to understand and process it beyond that. >> it's not hard, impossible. >> exactly. i think when you saw the debt ceiling debate in 2011, there were many people in the eighth congressional d congressional district that the president was being treated unfairly. the president needed to raise the debt ceiling for the good of the economy. there was debt accumulated, but he inherited two wars as well as the bush tax cuts that added to that. ronald reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times during his presidency. he was never accused of being fiscally irresponsible. moving forward, given the recession that we are still working our way through, pulling
5:36 am
out of, certainly it's been tremendous progress. the reality is we have to stimulate the economy in this short term. we have to create jobs and put americans back to work. that is what the people in the eighth congressional district want to see. >> it strikes me, molly, you were on the campaign trail a lot. you did great reporting and talking to a lot of folks. i wonder, like, the politics of this issue. i'm bias everyone can see because of how i feel. my sense is it becomes the words dead and deficit are ways of naming economic anxiety opposed to a commitment to what a balance ledger looks like. >> yeah. i think that's right. everybody cares about the deficit until it comes to the money they want to spend. whether it's through the tax breaks or government spending they want to put in the budget. given the caucus meetings haven't started yet is, i think
5:37 am
it really rests on what the republicans are going to do, how they are going to position themselves. you have, you know, the president coming out there very firm pointing out what the leverage is that he has and all the democrats really united saying we are willing to go off this cliff or curve. >> thank you. thank you. >> but, you know, that's the negotiating position. there's a negotiating position set an the other side by boehner and mcconnell. tough talk. you hear the language they are using saying tax rates instead of saying taxes and admitting revenue needs to be brought in. those are the spoke in signals saying we want to deal. we want to come together somehow. then the question is when you get into the loopholes, who is -- >> there's a new york times article this morning about a conference call boehner had with his caucus. it sounds like, from the reporting, it's all done for
5:38 am
specific reasons because certain people want to send certain messages. it sounds like boehner said look, we are going to have to deal. they are more okay with that than they have been in the past. what is weird to me is that the jobs aspect of this, which you are talking about in terms of what your constituents want and the thing you hear on the campaign trail. it's so absent from this conversation. it seems to me like the most important thing is growth. i'm with bob lucas that said that, right? once you think about growth, you can't think of anything else. exactly. growth is important. the point is, how do we get growth and full employment? that, to me, is a part of this conversation that's not here. >> some of the spending is investment. when government spends money on unemployment, which is part of this fiscal curve, it's manufactured. we could steer away from that curve by extending the emergency unemployment.
5:39 am
we put money in those pockets of people out of work. they spend it immediately. it goes into the economy. corporations have $1 trillion of cash waiting for a smoke signal that there's going to be aggregate demand. they know the government will provide people out of work with money that there's going to be a commitment to growth and job growth. those corporations are going to release those resources and create more jobs. >> it can't be said enough. the market is worried about uncertainty now. austerity is spooking the people i talk to as a reporter, we have hedge funds and wall street, it's the thing that worries them. there will be near term austerity. the world cares about this election and what the lame duck congress does. the world manifested through the fund said right now all countries, especially the united
5:40 am
states should not engage in austerity. basically, they are saying please steer away from that fiscal curve. >> it seems to me, the fiscal cliff, the fiscal curve is set up. >> just go with curve for the next hour and a half. >> we got it. >> it's designed to force compromise between two competing philosophies of how do you stimulate the economy. on the romney side you stimulate the economy by reducing taxes on the super wealthy who they claim to be job creators. it's a failed philosophy that is wrong. that is the philosophy as it relates to how to stimulate the economy. there are others who make the argument that you have to invest in the economy. you have to protect sbeet lmentes as it relates to society. you have to invest in transportation that requires targeted but increased spending. >> i want to come back to you because one of the prime issues
5:41 am
litigated in this was tax rates on the wealthiest. it's something you brot about in your book. i want to get your thoughts on that after we take a break. or that printing in color had to cost a fortune. nobody said an all-in-one had to be bulky. or that you had to print from your desk. at least, nobody said it to us. introducing the business smart inkjet all-in-one series from brother. easy to use, it's the ultimate combination of speed, small size, and low-cost printing.
5:42 am
5:43 am
and i took on all the bigger, tougher ones. but with mr. clean's new select-a-size magic eraser, he can take on any size job. at least we don't go near rex's mobile home as often. what are you, scared? [ dog barks ] aah! oh! [ male announcer ] new mr. clean select-a-size magic eraser.
5:44 am
during the campaign that proceeded our current debate, there was a lot of debate about taxes, particularly taxes in the highest tax bracket. the positions of the two candidates, barack obama said i want to extend all the bush tax cuts except for those in the highest tax bracket. it's moved around a bit whether it's above 250,000 or above a million. there's uncertainty where the cut off is. mitt romney said we are not raising tax rates for anybody. i want to get your thoughts on this because it seems like that argume argument, you can say a lot of things weren't litigated in the election, but that was, it seems to me. >> absurdly so.
5:45 am
>> how so? >> you have to close $900 billion. you are debating whether or not you are going to let the bush tax extension go on or not go on. you are debating $50 billion a year, not the main issue. >> you can't get to 900 until you get to 50 first. >> ultimately, you have to get to 900. there has to be a lot of tax increases and spending cuts. >> would you be willing for those to start if we were building a jenga tower of spending cuts and tax raises for one of the blocks to be $50 billion. we have to come up with 18 blocks like that. >> it has to be. >> it has to be. >> thank you. great. we got it. >> the problem is, we are debating the preelection spin, not real economics. they avoided debating real economics. now we are going to debate real
5:46 am
economics. what is the real inside game here? whether they get two bites of the apple for people over 250. we are going to say we want an increase this year. next year, you are really going to negotiate the $900 billion with 50 in the bank. they are going to come back for a second bite for people over 250. the tax rate doesn't come close to solving this problem. the fiscal cliff has $200 billion a year of tax increases on the middle class. we are talking $300 billion on the middle class that they kind of agree as their compromise. >> here's my feeling on this. molly, i want to get your thoughts on this. i actually think it's important for the -- it's like if you have been laid up in a hospital for awhile and you haven't moved your leg muscles and you have to go through physical therapy to build up the strength. we have not -- we have lost the
5:47 am
ability to raise taxes. as a political body, that muscle has totally atrophied. it's important from the health of the body politic and symbolically, even if only those $50 billion doesn't get to 900, just to say we can do it. look at this america. we are capable of raising revenue. what happens in country that is go the way of greece. >> this is where i disagree with hakeem. we ran this experiment, the u.s. versus europe over the last 25 years. we grew 63%. france grew 35% since 1991. germany grew 22%. japan 16%. we have 35% to 40% more hours of work per working age adult in the united states than germany and france have. this idea that -- >> because we -- >> lower taxes on investors
5:48 am
pumps up growth in the economy. it's hard to look the data in the face and come to that conclusion. the shocking difference between the u.s. and europe, it's stimulus spending and government spending and investment. europe would be kicking aur butts and greece would be the poster child of success. it's an unmitigated disaster. >> europe is not just one thing. it's norway and greece. >> yes. >> norway is doing well. amsterdam is doing well. >> you say germany is doing well. it grew 22%. it's barely come out of the recession. we are way ahead. >> the european example is a false example. it's a red herring. not that you are using it. i believe your views are an corresponded in philosophy. politically it's used to say we within the return to socialistic policies. the actual comparison should be the clinton economy versus the
5:49 am
bush economy. in the clinton years, tax rates ran 39% for the super wealthy. we are balanced. we have a surplus in terms of the budget and tremendous economic growth. the bush years, we drop the rate and we found ourselves, because of -- >> that's zero job creation. >> and the worst economy since the depression. europe is a false compareson. look at what's happened in america. >> we commercialize the internet in 1993. it's like commercializing the telephone. if you want to look at the effect the telephone has versus tax rates, you have to go, everybody got the telephone in 1990. us, europe, japan. we killed everybody, okay? because we had lower marginal tax rates and more innovation. you can't make the comparison today without taking the internet into it.
5:50 am
>> darpo is a government funding entity that created the internet. it did. i want to bring in shard brown after this. if you think running a restaurant is hard, try running four. fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, sherrod brown. plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase. constipated? yeah. mm. some laxatives like dulcolax can cause cramps. but phillips' caplets don't. they have magnesium. for effective relief of occasional constipation. thanks. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'.
5:51 am
[ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. and need to get my car fixed? progressive makes it easy, because we give you choices. you can pick where to get your car fixed, we can cut you a check, or, at our service center, we take care of everything for you. [ relaxing music playing ] [ chuckles ] -whew, so many choices. -take your time. -the service center. -okay. giving you choices -- now, that's progressive. call or click today.
5:52 am
5:53 am
i want to bring in senator sherrod brown of ohio who was reelected on tuesday. senator brown, first of all congratulations on your victory on tuesday night. i would like to hear your thoughts. you are right back at it the next day, memos zinging around about the fiscal curve negotiations. what is your approach going into this. what is your, i guess you are not going to tell me, but what are your red lines? >> you are looking for a balance. i was listening to the last ten minutes and wanted to comment. mr. connor talked ant compared the united states and economic
5:54 am
growth was better. it was clearer the way congressman jeffreys did it. if you look at the u.s. growth, it's not been much to brag about because of those economic policies that started more than a decade ago. what congressman jeffrey said is compare the clinton eight years with the bush eight years. i don't want to look back, but you can talk about the internet but look what happened with a bit higher tax rates, but a real investment in the middle class the way we did the clinton years. look at no job growth, no net job growth to speak of in the private sector. 20 million versus virtually close to zero. that gives instruction ahead. it's balance and we don't cut dramatically anywhere but the cuts will take effect. we let the tax cuts expire for over 250. every person, including
5:55 am
millionaires will get a tax cut up to $250,000 income, then pay higher taxes. it's not ownerous, it's a few percent higher. we can wait. we can go. we can save tens of billions of dollars on farm subsidies. spend on generic drugs. we can close tax loopholes like hedge fund operators and oil fund companies. all of those will bring significant, make significant progress toward deficit reduction in the next five to ten years. >> i want to get, quickly, your response. when you saw your colleague, the gentleman from kentucky, senator minority leader, mitch mcconnell. his statement he issued on tuesday night in the wake of the election was quite defiant saying if anyone thinks we were sent to raise taxes, they are
5:56 am
out of their mind. i couldn't help but notice he was the only person watching the fund-raiser p wednesday. he's up for re-electiore-electi. >> it was disappointment. i thought that sarah mcconnell would be better than that. i think speaker boehner was better than that. members of his caucus will be better than that. i hope he spoke without so much pulling his caucus. he's the same guy that after the 2010 elections talked about a mandate with the whole country because of that election. mitch mcconnell, three of the four elections have not been positive. in '06, 2008 and 2010. he felt like karl rove on election night. >> i want you to stick around. we are going to talk about after the fiscal curve, there's a
5:57 am
whole new term of congress which there's other stuff that is going to happen. i want to talk about what you are thinking about that after the break. and a trip to the one place with the new ideas that help us pull it all together. from the things that hang and shine... the things that sparkle and jingle. all while saving the things that go in our wallet. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. right now, get an assortment of martha stewart living ornamen,s free when you purchase select artificial trees. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 at schwab, we're committed to offering you tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 low-cost investment options-- tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like our exchange traded funds, or etfs tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 which now have the lowest tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 operating expenses tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 in their respective tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 lipper categories. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 lower than spdr tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and even lower than vanguard. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 that means with schwab, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 your portfolio has tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 a better chance to grow.
5:58 am
tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and you can trade all our etfs online, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 commission-free, from your schwab account. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so let's talk about saving money, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab etfs. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 schwab etfs now have the lowest operating expenses tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 in their respective lipper categories. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 call 1-800-4schwab tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 or visit tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 to open an account today. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 funding is easy tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab mobile deposit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 investors should consider tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 carefully information tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 contained in the prospectus, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 including investment objectives, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 risks, charges, and expenses. you can obtain tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 a prospectus by visiting tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 please read the prospectus tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 carefully before investing. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 i wish my patients could see what i see. ♪ that over time, having high cholesterol and any of these risk factors can put them at increased risk for plaque buildup in their arteries. so it's even more important to lower their cholesterol, and that's why, when diet and exercise alone aren't enough, i prescribe crestor. in a clinical trial versus lipitor,
5:59 am
crestor got more high-risk patients' bad cholesterol to a goal of under 100. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. ♪ is your cholesterol at goal? talk to your doctor about crestor. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
6:00 am
hello from new york. i'm chris hayes. with me i have democratic congressman elect hakeem jeffries. ed connor, former worker at bain capital. joining us on satellite is senator sherrod brown, democrat of ohio. senator, i want to get your thoughts and molly, i would like you to chime in here. there's going to be a budget discussion that happens in the next few weeks, next few months, maybe longer if it gets pulled over. then there's a new congress with a new term. i'm curious what you are going to washington to do in january. what do you want to see be on the agenda?
6:01 am
the president has the unique ability, i think in american politics, the biggest power he has aside from his power in the war making sphere, the power to set the agenda. what agenda do you want to see set starting in the new congress gregsal term. >> where he wants to go. i have had conversations with him in the white house both before this campaign and during this last campaign about what we do with manufacturing. we have seen after 12 years, 11 years of manufacturing job decline in this country, every single year, we have seen almost every month manufacturing job increase, about 500,000 jobs. nothing close to what we need. it was part auto rescue and trade rules with china. it was part of focus on community colleges. tomorrow, i'm going to be 30 miles west of here in an opening of a lithium-ion battery plant.
6:02 am
it's partly from federal investment. we learned from the auto rescue, it's got to be bipartisan. it's got to be a partnership when ever possible between the federal government and local communities and businesses. i see the president looking that way and going that way, partly enforcing trade rules, partly investing in clean energy in ohio. we are a manufacturing state, of course. it means medical device and so many other kinds of advanced manufacturing. we are moving in that direction well. >> molly, having covered the campaign, what are you expecting to see start be put in the pipeline in terms of a legislative agenda. once the fiscal budget conversation is ended. >> it's interesting to hear someone like senator brown talking about this. i think you have, among democrats, a sense they did win the policy argument in this
6:03 am
election. i'm listening to this economic policy debate. i think you can go around and around and around with that. what's new is democrats feel like they won the argument on raising taxes. in the past, you have had, this drives the left crazy. the democrats feel if you get called a tax raiser, you can't win. democrats have millions and millions and millions of dollars in their campaigns, calling them tax hikers and they still won. i know this is something senator brown believes, but democrats not as liberal are edging toward the perspective. the question is, sort of whether the republicans -- i think the republicans are in a disarray right now, not sure whether they can continue to beat that drum or if they will have to peel off and go along with the compromises. that's going to be the question. >> i don't think we did win the argument. senator brown won the argument. president obama won the
6:04 am
argument. you had mitt romney articulating a view of a $5 trillion tax cut largely benefiting the super wealthy and president obama saying there's got to be tax fairness. that means raising the rates on high income earners above $250,000. the clearest argument articulated. the american people supported that. for me, on what i hope to see in the next congress, beyond the big picture that is worked out with the american people, i'm inheriting a district hit hard by hurricane sandy. for me, everything changed on october 29th. this is where governorment compassion matters. fema matters to the people of the eighth congressional district. creating, providing humanitarian relief. largely driven by government at all levels and certainly the federal government has been important and will continue to
6:05 am
be important. >> one of the issues we have seen before, this is a process issue. if you indulge me, the way the filibuster mutated over the years. there's a push for filibuster reform. basically, you get a one day window to do anything with the filibuster where the rules are passed for the new term of congress. there's been more rumblings about filibuster reform. i'm curious where you are on this issue. is it something you want to see prioritized and pushed for or something you can take relief? >> i'm not a leader like the senator of new mexico. senators that weren't so certain have watched what's happened and they see a dysfunctional senate where there's what, one filibuster when lyndon johnson was a majority leader and '50s leading into 1960.
6:06 am
today, there have been in the last six years something upwards of 300. the senate can't operate it. we need to move more toward majority control in the senate. there's still many protections as there should be. there are things we need to do. the 41 vote rule. the motion to proceed. i won't go into everything. clearly, we have to do something for the senate to operate so mitch mcconnell can't wave his hand and block anything they want to stop because the senate will not respond to what the american people want if that's the case. i think there will be real sentiment to do it. we have more than 50 votes in the senate to do it. there will be success there, i think. >> i'm curious your thoughts on filibuster reform. it's an issue that has broken down slightly on ideological lines. there's a small r republican argument about these. what are your thoughts?
6:07 am
>> congress was set up so the president has to negotiate a bipartisan agreement except in extreme circumstances like 2008. it served our country well for 200 years. we have out performed the world. the difference between consumer who is consume every dollar out there and reaching from compromise between the two of them is more valuable than majority vote. >> i think it's an interesting analysis. consumers outnumber investors. one of the thing that is gets mediated is this battle between consumers and investors. this protection can be protection for the investor class against the majority. >> chris, i would call this -- >> little value, the investment. they don't realize how valuable this is. >> chris, i would call those consumers citizens. i don't look at elective office quite the way in our government. it's not a corporation.
6:08 am
it's different. we need corporate efficiencies to be sure. i can imagine corporations have a filibuster situation. it's beside the point. clearly, clearly, you can argue for 200 years it's work. mitch mcconnell was never the leader in the senate in the 1850s or the 1950s. when you have a senate leader who is willing to say one, i will do everything i can to stop the president of the united states from being reelected then you have that same leader filibuster hundreds of times. then you have the same leader, after losing big in an election. they expected to take the majority, losing seats and see the president reelected with more than 100 electoral vote margin saying he's going to continue to do this. something is dysfunctional. the dysfunction is one sided. i want to weigh both sides. on this one, the minority party in the senate kept it from doing the people's business. there's no question about that.
6:09 am
>> concede quickly there's an investor class and consumer class. consumers are citizens and they invest middle class and working class do a lot of investment. the rich folks to a hell of a lot of consuming. it's not how we grade the economic system. >> i want to thank sherrod brown for joining us. i want to have you back. it's going to be an interesting legislation. edward connor, former partner at bain capital. molly, great to have you. ed, thank you for being a good sport. i want to have you back, i really do. i enjoy arguing with you. ♪
6:10 am
[ male announcer ] the way it moves. the way it cleans. everything about the oral-b power brush is simply revolutionary. oral-b power brushes oscillate, rotate and even pulsate to gently loosen and break up that sticky plaque with more brush movements than manual brushes and even up to 50% more than leading sonic technology brushes for a superior clean. oral-b power brushes. go to for the latest offers.
6:11 am
6:12 am
6:13 am
one of the top headlines out of this election, the first found to citizens united has been a few very wealthy people spent a lot of money without a lot of results. the man who is responsible for getting people to part with their cash is karl rove. the master mind behind the cross roads organization. on tuesday night, he sat on fox news in a state of disbelief as the nurks called the ohio for president. >> i'm going to ask you a straight-out question. you went through it in 2000. almost in 2004. do you believe ohio is going to settle it? >> we have to be careful about calling things when we have 991 votes separating the two candidates and a quarter of the vote to count. even if they have made it on the basis of select precincts, i'm
6:14 am
cautious. >> rove was in denial. you can imagine why. they spent over $100 million in this cycle. according to the sunlight corporation, this is my favorite, 1.29% of that money went to candidates who won. 1.29%. rove reportedly spent the past week fielding questions from the billionaire backers. a perceived lack of super pacs, not all is lost for money. the further the money went, the more successful it was. this has been lost in favor of the well deserved skewering of karl rove. a man who has been called into question. >> the people who gave him the money, the coke brothers gave him $4 million. here, go get us a president. we got stuff we want to ramrod
6:15 am
through. we are going to turn this america -- we want america back. here, what is it going to take to get america back here? come on. $400 billion. bring back a real america, will ya? >> so, a lot of that money is left over and -- i tell you, the coke brothers, don't be surpr e surprised if you read he was beaten up by the coke brothers. joining us is neil. author of "bailout ts. robert wolf returning. host of the weekly web cast impact players on the reuters channel on youtube tv. also the profession sor for the university school of law. also, senator sherrod brown you are in ohio. i say good-bye to you, which is
6:16 am
premature. you had an up close look at big money in your last campaign. let's start out with this super pac big money story. that's the kind of headline story that dive in deeper. i'm going to take a second here. particularly with -- here is the thing i think is amazing. multibillionaire casino person, very conservative guy, spent a lot of money in this election. hundred million dollars, north of hundred million dollars in this election. here is a guy who made his money running casinos. they identify marks, right? they identify people that are easy to separate from their money. they give them suites, free drinks. the biggest mark in american poll sicks the him himself. he's the mother of all whales.
6:17 am
he walks into a casino, they part the ways for him. they line up and gorge themselves on his money. i think there's a certain kind of poetic beauty to that. am i wrong? >> i want to take away from your relish. i think we all felt that. you know, one of the things we have to look at is what is the return on investment? there's a temptation, who got elected. in fact, it's one of the policies. you know, there was not discussion of climate change. why not? i think he sadly may have got a good return on his investment if you look at where the tax discussion was. >> interesting. senator brown, you saw a lot of money from the outside. what is your take away from this race? i think you can say hey, look, basically, we found an
6:18 am
equilibri equilibrium. it didn't hurt me. >> my take was a couple things. first, i think, in my race, i won't speak for others, in my race, it wouldn't have been much of a race without $40 million in attack ads that came every week for a year. it puts them in the game to begin with. it's not great concern, but it's a factor. when you have this kind of money, the first thing you do is the first response is you have to be yourself. you can't let your money spook you, which it could easily do. it concerns you. you fight back in a way that you stand for what you stood for in the past. at the same time, make sure that people understand increasingly why they are spending this money. we knew, in our case, it was wall street. break up the largest banks. we knew it was oil companies to close the loopholes. we knew it was companies that outsource jobs to china. you know that.
6:19 am
you remind voters of that. i think what was said is a concern, too. some issues are talked about less in campaigns because of the money and the way we govern in the future. some of my colleagues who may not always be willing to stand-up to big money are going to think in the back of their heads, if i support this amendment, is the wrath of a super pac going to come down on me. i think we won against rove and all that. i think the insidiousness of this money stands. they will be back. the return on investment, he's looking at a $9 billion savings, he says. $9 billion savings if we eliminate the estate tax. these guys aren't going away. rove was pathetic on election night and has been since.
6:20 am
he's still a major player with access to tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars. they will be back. we need to deal with the citizens united case, straight forwardly and as focused away as we can. >> neil, you have written a book about how money is in washington. i want to hear what the lessons of this era were after the break. ♪ [ male announcer ] the way it moves. the way it cleans. everything about the oral-b power brush is simply revolutionary. oral-b power brushes oscillate, rotate and even pulsate to gently loosen and break up that sticky plaque with more brush movements than manual brushes and even up to 50% more than leading sonic technology brushes
6:21 am
for a superior clean. oral-b power brushes. go to for the latest offers. part of a whole new line of tablets from dell. it's changing the conversation. ♪ you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. we have so much technology in our store to really show the customers what's going on with their bodies. you can see a little more pressure in the shoulders and in the hips. ... now you can feel what happens as we raise your sleep number setting and allow the bed to contour to your individual shape. oh, wow. that feels really good. at sleep number we've created a collection of innovations dedicated to individualizing your comfort. the sleep number collection, designed around the innovative sleep number bed - a bed with dualair technology that allows you to adjust to the exact comfort your body needs. each of your bodies.
6:22 am
so whatever you feel like, sleep number's going to provide it for you. during our semi-annual sleep sale, save $500 on our classic series special edition bed set and for 5 days only enjoy 36 month financing on selected beds but only through monday. you'll only find the innovative sleep number bed at one of our 400 stores, where queen mattresses start at just $699. campbell's has 24 new soups that will make it drop over, and over again. ♪ from jammin' jerk chicken, to creamy gouda bisque. see what's new from campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do.
6:23 am
watching this unfold and having just come from washington and writing a book that was about the way in which big money operates on a day-to-day institutional level in washington, what do you take away from the race and do you think the kind of joy people feel about all the big money is premature, is it warranted? >> i think two things. first of all, as you said in the opening, in a big race like senator brown's race, you
6:24 am
attract a lot of money from both sides. that advantage, the super pac advantage, there's some counter weight. ultimately, all that noise canceling out. when you have a strong candidate with a strong message, it's going to have less of an impact on a smaller race. the second thing is before it gets too much for karl rove, remember, big elections are a big business. my guess is karl rove's bank account is bigger today than it was beforehand. one of the problems is a conflict of interest for the consultants. they get paid on volume. how many ads they place. they take a piece of that in their various consulting and spin offs. for them, it's a win either way. maybe there's a bit of debt degrating. they have a lit bit of time to recover. >> this is a great red state headline. this is now the incrimination period.
6:25 am
people are saying this, on the right, in the recrimination, there's a red state headline. campaign sources, the romney campaign wauz consultant con job. people thauz it was going to be the most expensive race in history. there's hundreds of millions of dollars flying around. as a donor, is that a concern of yours? >> as the wall street guy that is close to the president, i'm feeling okay today. listen, let me talk about the whole super pac situation. i think what we learned was this was not an election about pro-obama versus anti-obama. it was who was pro-obama and who was pro-romney. romney got less votes than mccain got. most people said in respect of the negative ads, i like the vision of president obama. that's why he won eight of nine swing states. it's why the middle went for him. the idea of money influence, yeah, it's important, but at the
6:26 am
end of the day, we have one vote. that one vote was loud for the president. >> here is my question to you. this is something i think about a lot. let's imagine mitt romney and barack obama both run and they each run, they have $10 million. just $10 million. are they running the same race, each of them, $10 million versus $10 million as they each run with $100 billion or $1 billion. as the money goes up, are we finding the same e quill librium or is there something that is changing the dynamics of the politics as we climb up. >> as you have more money, you are allowed to be more dynamic on the issues. at one point, it's about wall street, this and that. then it became about women's issues, immigration reform, infrastructure with fema and let's be blunt, at the end, most people thought okay, it was
6:27 am
important for the hurricane we have government involvement. it was important in brown's state we have involvement in the car auto bailout. the money allows you to be more dynamic. >> you are making the argument it's beneficial. you can talk about more things with this larger pool of money. >> you can talk about more things. >> big money clearly lost across the board. there were three objectives coming into play. defeat the president. strike one. retake the senate majority for the republicans. strike two. increase the house majority, strike three. they lost across the board. but, i do think moving forward, what you may see is the investors recalibrating and saying should this money have been spent in larger degree on a ground game as opposed to spending it on all these ads that oversaturate the market. >> i may have said this a couple months ago on this show.
6:28 am
this is amateur hour for super pacs. nobody knows how to use this money. they are just making it up as they go along. i don't think big money lost across the board. climate change, where was it? from my point of view, more discussion about wall street. >> there's a question about the big money loss on the issues in terms of the next congress. >> senator, immaterial to get your thoughts on this. there are two sides to this. big money, the president all in, his fund raising and the associated groups was one for one with the other side when you take the campaign associated groups. i don't think you can say it's big money on one side and not the other. i want your thoughts on it after the break. up your game. up the ante. and if you stumble, you get back up. up isn't easy, and we ought to know. we're in the business of up. everyday delta flies a quarter of million people
6:29 am
while investing billions improving everything from booking to baggage claim. we're raising the bar on flying and tomorrow we will up it yet again. stay top of mind with customers? from deals that bring them in with an offer... to social media promotions that turn fans into customers... to events that engage and create buzz... to e-mails that keep loyal customers coming back, our easy-to-use tools will keep you in front of your customers. see what's right for you at
6:30 am
6:31 am
senator brown, we were talking about big money and money in this election. this is slightly uncomfortable question. there's a lot of big money on the other side.
6:32 am
it prompts the question, the people giving money to your campaign, what are they expecting? what do they want? don't the dynamics play out on both sides of a campaign? >> it's a bit of a false equivalent. the amount of money on their side was 40 million youds dollars. my side was slightly under ten. our ten million was disclosed. you know, the people know my politics and know what i stand for. i think people giving me money knew that going in. robert wolf said something that expanded the debate. i think it did. more issues with more money. it also contributed, i think it's tempered by a more cynical electorate because of the number of tv ads. you live in a state like ohio, it was ad after ad after ad from about july on. people get more and more cynical about politics there. i also worry about what might be
6:33 am
next for this crowd because what was said earlier, they have more influence in state legislature. further down the chain you go. in ohio, the legislature is after republicans winning big in 2010. they went after women's rights, voters rights, collective bargaining rights. we are seeing that all over the country. it's one of the major impacts of outside money we have to be aware of looking forward. not just where i can fight back, i might be outspent two or three to one. i can fight back because i have resources and skills developed. it's harder for state legislatures where people aren't paying the same attention to them. >> it's a good point. because citizens united is a constitutional ruling, it finds a right to unlimited spending. it knocked down state laws that limited it. in places like montana and north carolina, all of a sudden you have this huge amount of outside money.
6:34 am
i was reading reports on this. someone writes a check for $300,000 with a week to go. you think about people making a decision. no one knows who these people are. you see a bunch of ads, it has an intense effect. >> the point is a good one. they are going to get better at this. this was a blunt instrument. in many ways, the super pac money hurt romney in this campaign as much as it helped. the outside money helped define him as this, you know -- it was a straight jacket during the general election. issues you were discussing earlier on twitter. what could have been a game changer was to the left, going after wall street and breaking up the banks. we saw a glimp of it. it could have been a game changer that delivered the election.
6:35 am
>> it's also something, you know, the breaking of the banks is something there's intellectual support for among writers and thinkers. so, it would have rooting in an ideological pool of people. there's an interest problem. >> i'm part of the 1%. i'm on wall street. most of my peers gave to super pacs. i did not. i'm close to bill burton. i don't want to contribute to a campaign part that is about the negative side. i remember having conversations where we were saying what a great ad that came out where the president was talking about his vision. those were the best advertisements. the president won because people liked him. they liked the direction it was going. favoribility was the highest since the osama bin laden raid. it's because they are seeing a different light. it's much more important. i think, you know, we can hit wall street, but wall street didn't drive super pacs. most of the people driving the super pacs were not part of wall street. >> i think that's actually --
6:36 am
>> they gave to romney in the disproportionate fashion. >> i think that's one of the interesting things. this was the era of super pacs as vanity projects for billionaires opposed to projects of vehicles for institutional industrial interest. >> correct. >> i think the next time we run this experiment we are going to get the second version. i want to think senator sherrod brown. elected on tuesday to the united states senate to serve his second term. a great pleasure. >> good to be back. thank you, chris. to the panel, thank you. >> we'll be right back. the way. the way it cleans. everything about the oral-b power brush is simply revolutionary. oral-b power brushes oscillate, rotate and even pulsate to gently loosen and break up that sticky plaque with more brush movements than manual brushes and even up to 50% more than leading sonic technology brushes for a superior clean.
6:37 am
oral-b power brushes. go to for the latest offers. that was me... the day i learned i had to start insulin for my type 2 diabetes. me... thinking my only option was the vial and syringe dad used. and me...
6:38 am
discovering once-daily levemir® flexpen. flexpen® is prefilled. doesn't need refrigeration for up to 42 days. no drawing from a vial. dial the exact dose. inject by pushing a button. flexpen® is insulin delivery... my way. levemir® (insulin detemir [rdna origin] injection) is a long-acting insulin used to control high blood sugar in adults and children with diabetes and is not recommended to treat diabetic ketoacidosis. do not use levemir® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause symptoms such as sweating, shakiness, confusion, and headache. severe low blood sugar can be serious and life threatening. ask your healthcare provider about alcohol use, operating machinery, or driving. other possible side effects include injection site reactions. tell your healthcare provider about all medicines you take and all of your medical conditions. get medical help right away if you experience serious allergic reactions, such as body rash, trouble with breathing, fast heartbeat, or sweating. with flexpen®... say good night to vial and syringe. ask your doctor about levemir® flexpen. covered by 90% of insurance plans,
6:39 am
including medicare. find your co-pay at we are talking about super pacs and big money and the wild and woolly era of post citizens united campaign financing and what it all says after the first election, first presidential election that's happened and hakeem jeffries, congressman elect from new york, there's a
6:40 am
story about a group called students first in the summer. they were a self-described education reform group. the term itself, i hate. it's a broad term that's appropriated by one side in a heated policy dispute about improving education. >> right. >> but the side of the other side from the teachers union. you were in a contested primary race. they announced in the primaries they are going to come in and spend some money on your behalf against your opponents. walk me through what happened next. >> there was a moment in time where it appeared my o ppponent was surging. so, he had secured the support of the outgoing incumbent, which was unexpected. then, he secured the support of the one of the largest municipal unions. the reason it was articulated as to why they didn't endorse me,
6:41 am
was because i had been supportive of charter schools as a vehicle for educational opportunity for poor, inner city students. students first announced in the context of a competitive primary, they were going to come in with outside money to support my candidacy because they agree with my openness to charter schools as an educational. i support charter school and public school systems. >> so you basically told them to back off, essentially. >> we can't coordinate, but we were able to -- >> to go to the press. >> a public statement and say we don't want the involvement of this particular group. we can win this race without outside money. we can win it without outside money. it's the right thing to dochlt it's what the people deserve. to their credit, they backed off, then gauged. >> as a progressive new yorker,
6:42 am
i was getting messages saying let's influence his campaign and ask him to push back. you see this across the board grass roots effort to push back against the super pacs. i don't know that it's going to last forever, but we have a small window. it was exciting grass roots. >> what's also interesting about this, one of the fascinating things about outside money is the person giving the money or spending the money can create an associational cost to the candidate. the candidate doesn't necessarily have veto power. in your case, you took a lot of heat. this is an incredibly fraught area in a democratic primary. i don't know what the thinking was on the calculation or principle of outside money or getting flak for it. >> there was a view with friends like this, who needs enemies. >> right. i remember you were getting creamed. all my lefty friends were calling you a sell out.
6:43 am
>> fortunately, i worked closely with the teacher's union over time and continue to work with them. we were able to put together an alternative narrative. it complicated things beyond the principle. >> having written a book and seen up close the way big money can skew policy in washington, i want to turn maybe to the conversation about how much of it is the campaign system and how much is something else. i think that's where the rubber hits the road here. we look at the $6 million spent in the campaign and look at the checks. there's an assumption of what is happening. a debt being incured that's not paid off with favors. your book is a great account of this. it's so much more complicated and diffuse than that. i want to get our hands around what it is. how much do you think the campaign finance system produced the capture you chronicle in your book. >> it put pressures and narrows the focus on what candidates are
6:44 am
going to do and what type can rise to the top and enter into the primaries and get the right money behind them. they self-select their positions of policies that conform. we have a strange system where they can't communicate with the candidate or coordinate. there's all different ways to coordinate rather than communications. i think you have a shaping of ideology that is going to flow. frankly, this is going to be too big of a business and too profitable for those within the system for there to be much push for reform. a candidate or member staffer to go and profit off those super pacs, it's going to mean more money that self-propagates the system. just like we have seen other areas of washington. >> i want to hear your thoughts on self-selection. let's take a break and i want to hear from you.
6:45 am
6:46 am
sleep train has your ticket to tempur-pedic. experience the pressure-relieving comfort of tempur-pedic, and sleep risk-free with sleep train's 100-day money back guarantee. get 36 months interest-free financing: no down, and no interest for 3 years. plus, get free same-day delivery. sleep train's 100-day money back guarantee, interest-free financing, and free delivery? that's the ticket! sleep train's ticket to tempur-pedic is on now. ♪ sleep train ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪
6:47 am
6:48 am
♪ in just a moment, what you should know for the news week ahead. first, a personal update, tomorrow november 12th, i'll appear at the miami book fare in miami, florida to talk about my book. tuesday, at 7:00 p.m., m.i.t. in cam bridge where i'll talk about my book. for more information on these events, go to our website, we want to update you on the congressional candidates we had on the show. hakeem jeffries was elected to congress. we have the first hindu member of the house. tammy bald win became the first openly gay woman to serve in the u.s. senate. shelly berkeley lost her bid to
6:49 am
a republican. democrat nate lost his challenge to tom reid. rob lost his challenge to paul ryan in wisconsin. congresswoman shelly was elected to a third term in may. a democrat is narrowly leading her race in arizona where ballots are still being counted. some of them are punishing their employees for president obama's victory. robert murray, the ceo for murray energy who ordered employees to miss a day of work without pay to attend a romney rally announced he will lay off 160 workers. he said he was going into survival mode as a result of
6:50 am
obama's reelection. papa johns will cut employee's hours as a result of president obama's elect. david segal is going to give hi them raises instead of firing them. what should you mow? on monday morning, michael more he will will start his first day as director of the central intelligence agency after the general david petraeus resigned. he cited an extra marital affair as a reason for resignation and subsequent reporting indicates that it's paula broadwell who wrote an extremely complimentary biography of then. since andrea mitchell broke the story on msnbc, additional details have come to light about at the race' affair with broadwell. we had a long spirited editorial meeting yesterday about whether to discuss the story on our air today. because important details are still to be resolved about this story, we decided not to. but we agreed that as basic facts become clear rg we'll dive into a lot of the important
6:51 am
issues involving petraeus. his role as a public figure, relations between the general and civilians. the rise of counter insurgency during our long wars an the increasing role of the cia as a paramilitary organization. speaking of petraeus, one of our nation's best known and celebrated veterans, you should know that today is veterans' day. it began in 1919 as armies tis day because it was a day in 1918 when the horror of world war i was brought to a close. in an official proclamation in 1926, congress said the holiday, "marked the cessation of the most destructive, far-reaching war in human an als. a peaceful relations with other nations which may never again be severed" and it was fitting that the anniversary of the date should be commemorated with thanksgiving and prayer and exercises designed to perpetuate peace through mutual understanding between nations.
6:52 am
after world war 2, president dwight eisenhower officially declared it veterans' day. we should reflect on both on the same day. one of the wars is over, one will end soon and as we move from war hopefully to peace, we will be a society that must still live up to the contract that we all have with the millions of men and women who as citizens have directed to wage war with lasting consequences that entails. you should know that during the upcoming fiscal cliff negotiations the discussion of sequester and balancing the budget there are those particularly on the right who want to cut the benefits of current service members and veterans. it must be a priority of the political left to see that that does not happen. i want to find out what my guests think we should know coming up for the week.
6:53 am
we'll begin with you hakeem jeffries. >> many people were encouraged by the sa a somewhat moderated tone of speaker boehner out of this recent election, particularly when you compare it to the tone of mitch mcconnell on the senate side. what will be interesting and what we should follow is next week, probably on wednesday, speaker boehner will have the first opportunity to conduct an in-person conference with the entirety of the membership. coming out of the conference, it will be interesting to see whether he remains with a moderated tone of common ground or whether he comes out of that conference with a more extreme line in the sand. >> totally. that's what is to watch for. >> neil barofsky. almost within hours of senator elizabeth warren's victory in massachusetts, we heard the float of the trial balloons and our outlets maybe she won't be on the senate banking committee, maybe some other committee. pushing back, i believe, from
6:54 am
the party establishment that wants to not have elizabeth warren in a place where she needs to be, where she could be a leading voice for regulatory reform and taking it to the large financial institutions that helped cause this last financial crisis and may do so again. really important that that gets pushed back and she's on the committee she needs to be on. the senate banking committee. >> it's where she has the expertise. the issue she's devoted herself to. it would seem quite strange not to put her on that committee. robert wolf. >> being veterans' day and entering the week of the lame duck session about the fiscal cliff, i felt like i should give a history lesson. individual state taxes post revolutionary war. post safely -- world war i, rates went to 77%, world war ii to 94%. the korean war, an excess profit
6:55 am
tax and the vietnam we had a tax liability surcharge. we all remember the gulf war when president bush said read my lips, no new taxes. yep, taxes. when president obama speaks about going back to the clinton era rates up 3% for the top 2% earners, this is not about class warfare. it's about helping pay for a ten-year war and those in congress that pledged to the grover norquist pledge, you are on the wrong side of history. and this is what you should know. >> that's a very, very great point. that there has always been a link between waging war and higher taxes for the reason that wars are expensive. that historical link that the republic has been detached in this era. >> zephyr teachout. >> that's a great poem. you should know on tuesday, the canvassing, recanvassing of a key new york state assembly vote
6:56 am
is happening. this is huge for new york, but also for money and politics. because cuomo might, should support citizen-led elections matching funds and if this is a democratically led senate we could change politics. >> and then andrew cuomo will have no excuse not to support public money and public elections here in new york. i want to thank nigh guests, hakim jeff ris, neil barofsky, inspector general for tarp, formerly. >> robert wolf and zephyr teachout, school of law. thank you. >> thank you for joining us. we'll be back next weekend saturday and sunday at 8:00. our guests include founder of stopping by as part of his 21-city bus tour. do the math. highlighting links between extreme weather and -- >> coming up is melissa harris-perry. the mandate debate. what will president obama rye to get done next. also, the incredible victory of women on election night. if you haven't seen what happened in new hampshire, this
6:57 am
is one you want to watch. that's melissa harris-perry coming up next. we'll see you next week here on up. [ male announcer ] do you have the legal protection you need?
6:58 am
6:59 am
at legalzoom, we've created a better place to turn for your legal matters. maybe you want to incorporate a business you'd like to start. or protect your family with a will or living trust. legalzoom makes it easy with step-by-step help when completing your personalized document -- or you can even access an attorney to guide you along. with an "a" rating from the better business bureau legalzoom helps you get personalized and affordable


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on